Since the method they are using can't be patented, the major pharmaceutical companies aren't interested in investing money into this since they can't make money off of it. At least that is what the article says. Hopefully with the collaboration between independent laboratories and universities they can get this thing tested, confirmed and all over the world to cure people. That's what I gather from the article.

In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective.

haha oh wow

strictly speaking, the mitochondria isn't even a human cell but an external organism that wandered into the cells of the first eukaryotes (hence the dna is different)
also, i'm 99% sure mitochondria don't have anything to do with fighting cancer

Since the method they are using can't be patented, the major pharmaceutical companies aren't interested in investing money into this since they can't make money off of it. At least that is what the article says. Hopefully with the collaboration between independent laboratories and universities they can get this thing tested, confirmed and all over the world to cure people. That's what I gather from the article.

In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective.

Mitochondria are always active, they produce ATP, an important source of cell energy. Badly written or poorly researched.

The part about pharmaceutical companies not picking it up because of lack of potential profit is no surprise, though.

From the article comments:

What the article means to say, is that the cells in question do not receive oxygen from the blood supply, so they cannot use the mitochondrial Electron Transport Chain (ETC) to produce ATP (energy). In an anaerobic environment, cells undergo fermentation to produce the bare minimum amount of ATP. This fermentation produces lactic acid (which incidentally causes the "burn" in strenuous exercise).

The American Cancer Society has this to say on the matter: "DCA has been tested in humans on a small scale for rare diseases of metabolism (energy production), but has recently shown some promise in the lab for cancer treatment. This has led some people with cancer to try taking DCA on their own. DCA is known to cause nerve and liver damage, as well as some other side effects. It may also be able to cause cancer in humans, but that has not been proven. At this time, clinical trials (studies on human volunteers) have just been started to find out if DCA might be helpful against cancer. No human studies have been completed yet, so it is unclear how or whether it might help, or what the proper dose might be."

If it did cure cancer governments would be all over that, even if pharmaceuticals weren't.

Cancer treatment costs alot of money and curing cancer would be a big boon to most economies, its one of the leading causes of death in the first world.

There is never going to be a magical "cure". How do you "cure" an abnormal growth? You can remove or eradicate it through treatment, but you can't "cure" cancer anymore than you can "cure" cysts.

Insurance companies would be the first to jump on this. Less people sick with cancer, the less they have to pay out for treatments. If they survive, those people, you would assume, would live longer and continue to pay for health insurance. You could argue that governments would want the opposite in order to maintain population control. Especially in the 3rd world.